University of Huddersfield Repository
Schofield, Keith
How to talk about the EU referendum at work – without getting into a fight
Original Citation
Schofield, Keith (2016) How to talk about the EU referendum at work – without getting into a fight. The Conversation. ISSN 2044­5032 This version is available at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/28517/
The University Repository is a digital collection of the research output of the
University, available on Open Access. Copyright and Moral Rights for the items
on this site are retained by the individual author and/or other copyright owners.
Users may access full items free of charge; copies of full text items generally
can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any
format or medium for personal research or study, educational or not­for­profit
purposes without prior permission or charge, provided:
•
•
•
The authors, title and full bibliographic details is credited in any copy;
A hyperlink and/or URL is included for the original metadata page; and
The content is not changed in any way.
For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please
contact the Repository Team at: [email protected].
http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/
University of Huddersfield Repository
Polyakova, Olga and Mirza, Mohammed T.
Service quality models in the context of the fitness industry
Original Citation
Polyakova, Olga and Mirza, Mohammed T. (2016) Service quality models in the context of the
fitness industry. Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal, 6 (3). ISSN 2042678X
This version is available at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/28545/
The University Repository is a digital collection of the research output of the
University, available on Open Access. Copyright and Moral Rights for the items
on this site are retained by the individual author and/or other copyright owners.
Users may access full items free of charge; copies of full text items generally
can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any
format or medium for personal research or study, educational or not-for-profit
purposes without prior permission or charge, provided:
•
•
•
The authors, title and full bibliographic details is credited in any copy;
A hyperlink and/or URL is included for the original metadata page; and
The content is not changed in any way.
For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please
contact the Repository Team at: [email protected].
http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
Service quality models in the context of the
fitness industry
ABSTRACT
Purpose: This paper reviews the concept of perceived service quality in the fitness industry
by considering the service-dominant logic (Vargo and Lusch, 2004) and examining existing
service quality models in the context of sport and fitness.
Methodology: The paper critically reviews generic and industry-specific models of service
quality in the fitness industry. The examination of the models is intended to identify the role
that the perspective of customers and the dynamics of service co-creation play in these
models.
Findings: Consideration of the context in a particular industry plays an important role in the
development of service quality models. If underestimated, it can result in a model being
inadequate or having limited explanatory potential. The review shows that both generic and
fitness industry-specific models have methodological and conceptual limitations. This
requires researchers to consider developing new contextual models that acknowledge a)
service as co-creation of experience/value between suppliers and customers; and, b) the goal
of this co-creation as fulfilment of customers’ aspirations. Such an approach brings a new
light to the meaning of ‘a customer’s perspective’ and emphasises the dynamics of service cocreation in the fitness industry.
Practical implications: The study provides an agenda for future research to consider
perceived service quality models from the customers’ perspective. It suggests researchers to
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
take into account various factors of consumer behaviour (e.g. motivation) which are unique to
sport and fitness services. Also, managers of fitness facilities need to revisit their tools for
capturing customers' perceptions and to update the areas included in customer satisfaction
surveys.
Originality/value: The paper provides an insight into the role of co-creation for service
quality in fitness services. It contributes towards establishing revised relations between
service quality in fitness and contextual industry-specific factors suggested by numerous
studies previously.
SERVICE QUALITY MODELS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE FITNESS
INDUSTRY
1. Introduction
The needs of customers and their perspectives on service quality is a research issue which
has moved to the forefront of the agenda for fitness organisations operating in an increasingly
competitive environment. According to Walsh (2013), consumers in the fitness industry are
now more demanding, and clubs are faced with the challenge of meeting their high
expectations. In line with global trends, the UK fitness market is still expanding despite the
economic slowdown. Over the last five years total market value of the UK fitness industry has
grown by 4%, the member base by 8.3% and the number of fitness facilities by 3.9% (Leisure
Database Company, 2013).
In this market environment fitness clubs inevitably seek methods of both retaining
existing customers and attracting new customers. Research provides evidence that delivering
high quality service brings benefits of profitability and customer retention (Parasuraman et
al., 1988; Philip and Hazlett, 1997). Previous studies investigated relationships between
service quality, customer satisfaction, loyalty and behavioural intentions. For example, it has
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
been found that the effect of service quality on behavioural intentions is mediated by a
consumer's level of satisfaction (Brady and Robertson, 2001). On other hand, some facets of
quality can influence customer satisfaction in the health and fitness sector, and this in its turn
leads to increased word-of-mouth communications (Alexandris et al., 2004). Moreover, the
combination of service elements and corporate values is significantly associated with
members' satisfaction levels and their intentions to stay (Macintosh and Doherty, 2007).
The twin challenges of expansion of the current UK fitness market and the competitive
race for customers place a significant focus on service quality and the identification of what
customers actually perceive as quality. In an attempt to discover this latter point, researchers
have proposed a multitude of service quality models over the past 25 years. Some studies
focused on general models (e.g. Cronin and Taylor, 1992; Grönroos, 1988; Parasuraman,
Zeithaml and Berry, 1988); others developed or revised models for particular industries
(Aldlaigan and Buttle, 2002; Ko and Pastore, 2004; Lam and Zhang, 1999; Martinez and
Martinez, 2007). Various published studies have emphasised the need for developing industry
specific service quality models. The argument is that industry-specific attributes could assist
researchers in producing service-quality dimensions and scales for measuring perceived
service quality in a particular industry (Brady and Cronin, 2001; Ladhari, 2008; Martinez and
Martinez, 2008, 2010). Certain service industry sectors have attracted the most attention from
researchers: banking (Aldlaigan and Buttle, 2002; Karatepe et al., 2005; Sureshchandar et al.,
2002), hospitality (Akbaba, 2006; Getty and Getty, 2003; Wilkins et al., 2007), health care
(Shemwell and Yavas, 1999; Tomes and Ng, 1995), IT and technology-based systems
(Parasuraman et al., 2005; Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003) and travel agency sectors (Lam and
Zhang, 1999; Martinez and Martinez, 2007).
It has been long established that perceived service quality stems from customers and is
determined by them (Grönroos, 1982; Parasuraman et al., 1991). Several studies have
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
developed models to explain and measure service quality in the fitness industry (e.g. Kim and
Kim, 1995; Chang and Chelladurai, 2003; Ko and Pastore, 2003; Lam et al., 2005; Yildiz,
2011). Previous research (Arnould and Price, 1993; Kupers, 1998; Schembri and Sandberg,
2011) has confirmed that consumers do not passively receive service quality but actively coconstruct the quality of the service they experience. In the context of physical fitness,
consumers participate in exercise and through this co-create service guided by a reason for the
involvement. This reason, or motive, can be formed by various factors (Ryan et al., 1997;
Afthinos et al., 2005; Mullen and Whaley, 2010) and may have an impact on the ultimate
experience of a service. Indeed, Zeithaml and Bitner (2003) suggested that psychological
factors such as an individual's motivations and self-competence also influence customers’
perceptions of service quality and their satisfaction.
This paper reviews the concept of perceived service quality in the fitness industry and
examines the existing service quality models in the context of sport and fitness. Current
developments in marketing research suggest that the organisational focus of creating brands
has shifted to building customer relationships through service marketing and creating
compelling customer experiences (Maklan and Klaus, 2011). As customer experience is a
very personal construct at the rational, emotional, physical and other levels (Gentile et al.
(2007), it becomes important to explore whether existing quality models for the fitness
industry accurately reflect the concept from the perspective of customers.
The concept of 'service experience' has been referred to as a key concept in the servicedominant logic, which places a service experience at the core of all business (Lusch and
Vargo, 2006; Schembri, 2006; Vargo and Lusch, 2008). According to Maklan and Klaus
(2011), through engaging in service experiences and co-creating them, customers aim to fulfil
their aspirations and achieve a higher-order goal, that is 'value-in-use'. An understanding of
how to provide value-in-use requires consideration of customers’ experiences and
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
investigation into the guiding factors behind these experiences. In this regard, the paper
makes some suggestions on how to develop future service quality in the fitness industry.
2. Service quality and fitness industry context
Service quality in the sport and leisure industry emerged as a recognised research stream
in the late 1980s. To date, numerous studies have focused on identifying dimensions of
quality in the sport and fitness industries (Chang and Chelladurai, 2003; Alexandris et al.,
2004; Ko and Pastore, 2005; Lagrosen and Lagrosen, 2007; Moxham and Wiseman, 2009).
The identification of key dimensions is important for encapsulating all the main components
of service quality in the fitness industry. However, there is still no agreement in the literature
as to what those dimensions are.
As service-oriented entities, fitness organisations inherited the unique service
characteristics of intangibility, perishability, inseparability and heterogeneity (see more on the
characteristics in Ghobadian et al., 1994; Fitzgerald et al., 1993). However, due to some
specific features of sport, there are significant differences between sport and other service
based offerings. Relevant studies suggest that the unique motivations of those who consume
sport (McDougall and Levesque, 1994; Rust and Oliver, 1994; Ko and Pastore, 2004; Szabó,
2010) are: human performance (as an important “core product”); high involvement of
consumers in co-producing a sport service (Lovelock, 1996); the social nature of the service;
‘excruciating’ participation, orhabit towards the service (Schneider and Bowen, 1995);
valence, or factors out of the control of a service provider (Brady and Cronin, 2001;
Alexandris, 2004); evaluation of the immediate outcome of service (i.e. experience); and,
after-use benefits (Hu et al., 2009).All these factors contribute towards the uniqueness of the
nature of taking part in sport and fitness activities.
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
Producing the fitness service (e.g. personal training sessions, group exercise classes or,
individual sessions in the gym) together with the service provider is the central activity of
customers in both public sector and private sector sport centres. This represents the
cooperative nature of participation in sport and fitness where organisations and customers act
together to create value (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004; Vargo and Lusch, 2004).
2. Co-creation of service in fitness industry
The characteristics of a sport and fitness service form strong links with the servicedominant logic (Vargo and Lusch, 2004) which suggests that a customer always co-creates a
value in service transactions. Service-dominant logic argues that value is created in the
interaction process between the company and the customer rather than exclusively in the
provision of service (Gronroos, 1997; Etgar, 2008). Previously, the terms -'co-creation' and
'co-production' have been used seemingly interchangeably and researchers did not
differentiate the concepts. Thus, Vargo and Lusch (2004) initially assigned the same meaning
to the terms co-creation and co-production; at a later stage co-creation was divided into two
components - co-creation of value (i.e. value is jointly created by the customer and the
supplier during consumption) and co-production (i.e. the customer’s participation in the core
offering itself). By contrast, co-creation and co-production were presented as completely
different concepts by Ballantyne and Varey (2006). They argued that although the desired
result of cooperation between the customer and the supplier in both cases is the same (i.e.
unique value), the two terms are not connected because co-creation is based on collaboration
and dialogical interaction, whereas meaningful co-production is not possible without certain
prerequisites (e.g. resources, capabilities).
Various authors have attempted to approach co-creation as a continuum based on the
extent of a customer's involvement in the process. Ives and Olson (1984) proposed a user
involvement continuum that included six categories of customers' input (Figure 1):
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
[Figure 1]
The higher the level of customers’ involvement, the greater input customers make to the
service delivery process and, therefore, the final outcome. Although, it represents an increased
level of customers’ control over the process, the positive or negative input largely depends on
customers’ expertise in co-creation and the value that they see in it. Schembri and Sandberg
(2011) describe different levels of customer's involvement by referring to the three types of
experiential meaning of service quality held by customers: a passive experiential meaning; a
monitoring meaning; and, a partnering experiential meaning. These three meanings drive
customers' evaluations of service quality and can be used by service providers to adjust the
service offered accordingly. Yi and Gong (2013) proposed two factors in customer value cocreation behaviour: participation behaviour, which is essential for value co-creation; and
extra-role citizenship behaviour, which is voluntary. Participation behaviour includes
information seeking, information sharing, responsible behaviour and personal interaction,
whereas customer citizenship behaviour includes feedback, advocacy, helping other
customers and tolerance. The customer citizenship behaviour factors represent additional
features of customers’ expertise in co-creation. Yet, despite the fact that customers’ expertise
may positively or negatively influence the service outcome, there is evidence from other
industries (in particular the ones related to hospitality and travelling) that the degree of cocreation affects customer satisfaction with service company, customer loyalty, and service
expenditures (Grissemann and Stokburger-Sauer, 2012); and therefore appears to be an
antecedent of competitive advantage (Chathoth et al., 2013).
To date, research on service co-creation in sport related industries has been limited.
Mainly, the focus has been on sporting events, sport spectators and sport fans (e.g. Funk and
James, 2001; Mahony et al., 2000; McDonald and Karg, 2014). There is evidence of evolving
academic discussion on the concept of value co-creation in sport management (e.g.
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
Woratschek et al., 2014). Studies by Chelladurai (2013) and Cunningham (2013) suggested
that further development of theories and models used in sport management was needed. This
is in line with recognising the fact that the service-dominant logic and the concept of cocreation "have yet to be sufficiently applied in practice, and empirical studies are few and far
between as a result" (Woratschek et al., 2014, p. 2).
In the fitness industry, consumers’ participation in exercise, engagement with specific
sport centre and involvement in service co-creation implies the existence of a reason or
motive for this involvement. Roberts (1992) describes a motive as a drive, stimulus or reason
why people do something. In the context of exercise participation, motives are regarded as
reasons that individuals give for engaging in physical activity: the terms ‘participation
motives’ and ‘reasons for exercising’ are suggested as being interchangeable (Markland and
Ingledew, 2007). There are different factors that influence motives for participating in sport
and fitness exercise, e.g. gender (Biddle and Bailey, 1985; Mullen and Whaley, 2010), age
(Kremer et al., 1997), experience (Ryan et al., 1997) and type of sport centre (Afthinos et al.,
2005). In addition to the fact that motives can vary greatly from individual to individual,
people may have more than one motive for participation in a fitness activity; these motives
can also be coming either from within the person (intrinsic motives) or from the outside
(extrinsic motives) (Thatcher et al., 2009).
Motivations for participation in exercise may revolve around physical, psychological,
social and generic wellbeing benefits (Alexandris et al., 2004; Ko and Pastore, 2005;
Lagrosen and Lagrosen, 2007). The nature of customers' motivations creates the context for
the interactional dialogue with a service provider that is to take place for any type of
collaboration. Also, the fitness club resources and initial capabilities of the customers (i.e.
physical, mental, and financial) will determine the need or level of involvement in co-
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
creation. The combination of these co-creational factors at the core of the service will shape
the customers' experience and essentially their experiential meaning of service quality.
3. Service quality models
Traditionally, the disconfirmation paradigm has been the basis for service quality
conceptualisations (i.e. where quality is viewed as the result of comparing performance with a
set standard). According to Grönroos (1984), perceived service quality is “the outcome of an
evaluation process where the customers compare their expectations with service they have
received” (Grönroos, 1984, p.37). Parasuraman et al. (1988) support the same view, defining
the concept of service quality as “a form of attitude related to but not equivalent to
satisfaction that results from a comparison of expectations with perceptions and performance”
(p.15).
The first service quality models emerged in the 1980s and originated from the Nordic
(Grönroos, 1984) and American schools of thought (Parasuraman et al., 1985; 1988). The
Nordic perspective suggested two service quality dimensions - functional quality and
technical quality. According to the American model, or SERVQUAL, service quality is the
difference between the expected level of service and customer perceptions of the level
received (Parasuraman et al., 1985). Subsequent critiques of the American model led to the
emergence of the SERVPERF model (Cronin and Taylor, 1992). Unlike SERVQUAL,
SERVPERF is a performance only measure of service quality and excludes consumers'
expectations due to them being consistently high. In 1994, the Nordic perspective triggered
the development of a three-component model (Rust and Oliver, 1994) with three distinct
components - service product, service delivery and service environment.The work by
Grönroos (1982) and Bitner (1992) formed the basis for this model which focused on the
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
relationships existing between service quality, service value and satisfaction.Another two
models by Dabholkar et al. (1996) and Brady and Cronin (2001) added more levels to overall
service quality suggesting a multilevel nature of service quality (i.e. higher order factor,
dimensions level, and sub-dimensions level) and expanded the number of sub-dimensions for
service quality accordingly.
In their model, Brady and Cronin (2001) combined the three-component model by Rust
and Oliver (1994) and the multilevel conceptualization of service quality by Dabholkar et al.
(1996). As a result, service quality is formed by three primary dimensions (interaction quality,
physical environment quality and outcome quality) and three corresponding sub-dimensions
in each dimension. Martinez and Martinez (2010) noted that in the model sub-dimensions
influence quality dimensions, i.e. sub-dimensions directly contribute to perceptions of quality
dimensions. Nevertheless, Brady and Cronin’s (2001) model is operationalised in a different
way such that dimensions are variables that influence sub-dimensions. This contradiction has
not been addressed and presents a concern for interpretation of the model. Another study by
Dagger and Sweeney (2006) utilized Brady and Cronin’s work (2001) for producing a model
to measure the impact of service evaluations on customers’ behavioural intentions and their
quality of life. The model focused on the social and economic outcomes of service provision
within the context of the health care sector. It adapted dimensions of functional and technical
quality from Brady and Cronin (2001) and added customer satisfaction, behavioural intentions
and quality of life. The model suggested that dimensions of technical and functional quality
affect the level of customer satisfaction differently; and in turn, these two service quality
dimensions, together with customer satisfaction, influence the behavioural intentions and
quality-of-life perceptions of customers.
Although Brady and Cronin’s (2001) model was argued to have superiority with respect
to earlier models (Ko and Pastore, 2005; Martinez and Martinez, 2010), it has contradictions
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
that have not been addressed (such as direction of influence between levels of quality). To
overcome these issues, Martinez and Martinez (2010) suggested using Brady and Cronin’s
(2001) model alongside the identification of the dimensions of service quality in the context
of a particular industry.
Over time, the nature and number of service quality dimensions (or attributes) differed
depending on the approach of the various authors. In addition to the differences in authors’
approaches, Dagger and Sweeney (2007) suggested that service attributes can vary amongst
groups of customers with different consumption characteristics. For example, service attribute
weights differ between across new customers and those who have been using service for a
while (Dagger and Sweeney, 2007). Along similar lines, Bogomolova (2011) found that
solely loyal customers give about 10% more positive service quality evaluations than
customers using more than one provider. However, the latter study did not look into the
relationships between service quality evaluations of those two groups of customers and
service attribute weights.
4. Service quality models in the fitness industry
Similar to generic service quality models, the first service quality models for sport and
recreation were created in the form of scales in order to measure the quality of services in a
quantitative way. The models inherited conceptual and structural ideas from their
predecessors (e.g. thematic areas of service quality, attributes of service quality); and
influential approaches such as SERVQUAL also had an impact on the development of quality
measures for the sport and fitness.
In this paper, the structured literature review (Petticrew, 2001; Petticrew and Roberts,
2006; Tranfield et al., 2003) focused on empirical and conceptual research that proposed new
or adapted service quality models for the sport and fitness industry. The principles of metasynthesis (Tranfield et al., 2003) and meta-interpretation (Weed, 2005a; Weed, 2005b) were
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
utilised for the research synthesis. Search terms included combinations of the following: (1)
service quality, (2) model, (3) scale, (4) fitness industry, (5) health and fitness, (6) leisure club
or centre, and, (7) recreational sport. Searches included peer-reviewed articles between the
years 1980 and 2014. To be considered for further consideration, studies had to satisfy the
following criteria: (1) propose a new (or adapted) model of service quality for the context of
sport and fitness; (2) include a model designed to consider service quality from the
perspective of customers; and, (3) include a model that considers perceived service quality
phenomenon in a systematic manner. Nine articles (Table 1) were identified as appropriate to
be included in the review. Further, thematic analysis of service quality dimensions was
performed across seven models that can be operationalised for explaining or measuring
customer perceptions of service quality (Appendix 1).
[Table 1]
Chelladurai et al. (1987) became pioneers and proposed the first scale for measuring
service quality in fitness centres, namely Scale of Attributes of Fitness Services (SAFS). The
scale included five dimensions: professional, consumer, peripheral, facilitating goods, and
goods and services. Later, this scale was re-developed into the Scale of Quality in Fitness
Services (SQFS) by Chang and Chelladurai (2003).
As the 1990s saw further critique focused on the SERVQUAL instrument (it generally
started to be considered inadequate for specific industries), Kim and Kim (1995) developed
the Quality Excellence of Sports Centers (QUESC) scale, which consisted of 33 items.
Initially, the QUESC instrument consisted of 45 items of which 33 stayed in the final version
of the scale. These 33 items fall under 11 dimensions identified by exploratory factor analysis.
However, three of eleven dimensions (price, privilege, stimulation) included only one item.
Research carried out by Papadimitriou and Karteroliotis (2000) in Greece did not support the
dimensions of QUESC based on a sample of Korean respondents. Instead, Papadimitriou and
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
Karteroliotis (2000) proposed a 4-dimensional model that included Instructor Quality, Facility
Attraction and Operation, Program Availability and Delivery, and Other Services. Also, Lam
et al. (2005) questioned the statistical stability of QUESC single-item dimensions and
questioned the generalizability validity of the scale due to the unique nature of the Korean
context in which fitness centres operate. Afthinos et al. (2005) applied the QUESC model in
Greek fitness centres in their research; however they did not critique the instrument.
Based on SERVQUAL (Parasuraman et al., 1988), RECQUAL measuring quality in
recreational services (Crompton et al., 1991), and the Scale of Attributes of Fitness Services
(SAFS) (Chelladurai et al., 1987); Chang and Chelladurai (2003) developed the Scale of
Quality in Fitness Services (SQFS).
SQFS included items from previous models and items generated by the authors
themselves. The content validity of the items belonging to the different dimensions was
assessed by a panel of 15 experts and 4 faculty members. The nine dimensions were
confirmed through confirmatory factor analyses and proved to be independent of each other.
As SAFS (1987) formed the basis for SQFS development, Lam et al. (2005) critiqued SAFS
on the methodological rigour of its scale development, in particular the lack of qualitative
research as well as the lack of statistical procedures in the examination of the SAFS' factor
structure. Although, the version of SQFS (2003) employs a panel of experts and faculty
members, there is a still lack of qualitative research involved to obtain the customers
perspective on service quality. This major limitation of the scale was recognised by Chang
and Chelladurai (2003) themselves, who suggested that future research should involve fitness
club members as well to add additional relevant dimensions.
Another scale with six dimensions - Service Quality Assessment Scale (SQAS) - was
developed by Lam et al. (2005) via the employment of rigorous methodological procedures.
Lam et al. (2005) recommended that other researchers should re-examine the SQAS using
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
different samples to study further factor structure. The comparison to another scale has been
suggested “if the scale was developed with the same degree of emphasis on scale construction
and specificity for the health–fitness setting, for convergent validity” (Lam et al., 2005, p.
106). Yet, the scale does not offer the measurement of overall perceived service quality
(Martinez and Martinez, 2010) or the measurement of perceived quality of individual
dimensions. The model also does not include the outcome quality proposed by Brady and
Cronin (2001) and Ko and Pastore (2004).
Brady and Cronin’s (2001) model served as the basis for study by Alexandris et al.
(2004), whose model is based on three dimensions (interaction quality, physical environment,
outcome quality) and nine sub-dimensions of service quality. Unlike in Brady and Cronin’s
(2011) model, the sub-dimensions of waiting time, tangibles and valence were excluded from
the model with no explanation provided by the authors. While some of items were adapted
from Brady and Cronin (2001) (e.g. most of items in interaction quality), some were left out
or totally new ones were developed (e.g. in outcome quality). The structure of items proposed
by Alexandris et al. (2004) does not reflect a reliability item, a responsiveness item, or an
empathy item as suggested by Brady and Cronin (2001). Moreover, no qualitative techniques
were employed to discover new items; confirmatory activities (such as expert opinion) have
not been utilized either. Also, the model does not consider overall measurement of individual
dimensions or overall service quality. Alexandris et al. (2004) recognized the limitations of
the model relative to the sample (n=175 members of a single private fitness club in Greece)
and suggested testing the model with bigger sample sizes from different sport service
organisations. Therefore, there are issues with statistical validity of the second-order factors
(sub-dimensions) and the overall generalisability of the model.
Similar to the previous model by Alexandris et al. (2004), Ko and Pastore (2005) utilized
several aspects of the work of Brady and Cronin (2001) and Dabholkar et al. (1996) within
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
the context of recreational sport; which led to the Scale of Service Quality in Recreational
Sport (SSQRS) being developed. It included dimensions of program quality, interaction
quality, outcome quality and physical environment quality. On the basis of a review of
literature on service quality, the researchers generated an initial pool of 77 items that
explained the 11 sub-dimensions of service quality. Multiple measures for each of the subdimensions were developed and modified from the items of existing scales (e.g. Brady and
Cronin. 2001; Crompton et al., 1991; Howat et al., 1996; Kim and Kim, 1995; Parasuraman et
al., 1988). Statistical tests supported the model and it has been argued that SSQRS fills the
gaps in service quality conceptualization in the recreational sport industry (Brady and Cronin,
2001). However, the major limitation is the generalizability of the scale as it has been tested
on the sample of “sport participants within the Department of Recreational Sports at a large
university located in the Midwest region in the US” and “a majority of the respondents were
university students between the age of 18-22 (46%) and between the age of 23-30 (35%)” (p.
90). Ko and Pastore (2005) proposed to carrying out further analysis of the items in different
industry segments in order to determine the reliability and validity of the scale. Furthermore,
the applicability of the conceptual framework in other sport industry segments is yet to be
tested.
Some other studies (e.g. Lagrosen and Lagrosen, 2007; Moxham and Wiseman, 2009)
used case-studies to explore service quality; however, the case-study approach led to
limitations of generalisability of their findings. The most recent study by Study by Yildiz
(2011) proposed Service Quality Scale for Fitness Centres (SQS-FC). The study employed a
two-stage methodology that included qualitative convergent in-depth interviews and a
quantitative scale application.
The main limitation of the model is the relatively small sample derived from a private
fitness club in Turkey. Yildiz (2011) mentions that the Turkish market is emerging (p.7033),
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
therefore the results of the study might not be generalized to other fitness clubs in European
or Asian markets, or to clubs in other sectors (i.e. non-profit). Also, the scale by Yildiz (2011)
does not consider outcome quality and elements of interaction quality related to other
members. Overall, the items on SQS-FC closely resemble those on SQAS by Lam et al.
(2005), with the main difference being in the breakdown of dimensions. Still, the scale by
Lam et al. (2005) employs a more comprehensive methodology, i.e. a literature review, field
observations, interviews, modified application of the Delphi technique, a pilot study and
exploratory factor analysis.
The authors of the reviewed studies suggested various dimensions of service quality
which led to the different ways of explaining the concept (Table 2).
[Table 2]
Despite this, the models in Table 2 embrace traditional conceptualisations that present service
quality as a set of fixed service dimensions. As with service quality models in other
industries, the development of quality models for fitness have been influenced by the
positivist approach to measuring quality, however none of the models clarify their
philosophical stance (Polyakova and Mirza, 2015). Over time, the models have improved the
conceptualisation of service quality and its dimensions. All of them have several service
quality dimensions and, therefore, are multidimensional (Martinez & Martinez, 2010). In
practical terms, these dimensions represent a measurement tool for service quality. However,
perceived service quality itself is a theoretical construct which represents a phenomenon of
theoretical (i.e. not applied) interest (Edwards & Bagozzi, 2000). Discussion of different
philosophical approaches to viewing service quality goes beyond the scope of this paper;
however the work of Martinez and Martinez (2010) provides further detail as it provides an
explanation of why philosophical considerations are important to maintain a constructive
dialogue between researchers in the contemporary service quality field.
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
5. Discussion
As mentioned previously, service quality models in fitness industry have been
conceptualised in different ways and their authors suggested various dimensions of service
quality. However, some dimensions cannot be directly applied to measure perceived service
quality from the perspective of customers (e.g. in Chang and Chelladurai (2003), Lagrosen
and Lagrosen, (2007), and Moxham and Wiseman (2009)).
The dimensions that are most common across service quality models fall into main six
groups, namely Personnel, Physical environment, Social environment, Program, Supporting
services, and Outcome (Appendix 1). These dimensions include sub-dimensions that can be
directly experienced and evaluated by customers. Several distinct elements of service quality
that exist in some models are absent in others (e.g. pleasant social environment, wide range of
services, operating time etc.). On the other hand, some sub-dimensions appeared to be in other
models under different dimensions. For example, Kim and Kim’s (1995) dimension of
employee attitude exists within Chang and Chelladurai’s (2003) Interpersonal Interactions
with Employees, Alexandris et al.’s (2004) Interaction quality, Lam et al.’s (2005) Personnel,
and Lagrosen and Lagrosen’s (2007) relational competence.
The analysis showed that considerable attention across the models is paid to the subdimensions of Personnel, Physical environment and Social environment whereas Program,
Supporting services and Outcome have received relatively less attention (Table 3).
[Table 3]
The studies considering Outcome as a dimension of service quality included 'softer'
factors related directly to an individual's perception of the benefit they get from the service
and indirectly to the role they play in the process. The qualitative study by Lagrosen and
'This article is © Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this version to appear
here. Emerald does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted
elsewhere without the express permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited.'
Lagrosen (2007) proposed three service quality dimensions (Physical change, Mental Change
and Pleasure) linked to an individual's intrinsic characteristics. This is in line with the theory
(e.g. Dabholkar, 1995) suggesting that the intrinsic characteristics of a population determine
the nature of the service quality-satisfaction link. Similarly to Ko and Pastore (2005) who
included dimensions of Physical change and Valence in their model, Alexandris et al. (2004)
considered some physiological factors in the Outcome dimension.
It appears that the models that eliminate Outcome as a service quality dimension (e.g.
Kim and Kim, 1995; Lam et al., 2005; Yildiz, 2011) tend to consider the dimensions that can
be directly controlled by the organisation. However, the Personnel dimension that is present
in all models inevitably leads to interactions with customers and, therefore, is of an inherently
less controllable nature. Customers do take part in the service and also become the cocreators; which results in either two-way or one-way communication that forms customers’
perceptions of facility staff. However, to what extent is it advantageous to describe perceived
service quality with dimensions that are predominantly controllable by organisations, whilst
not taking into account the very reasons for these perceptions? Also, to what extent is the true
emphasis on the customers' perspective and the dynamics of service co-creation reflected in
existing models of service quality?
Figure 2 proposes a new scope for the development of future service quality models in the
fitness industry. It stems from service-dominant logic that encompasses the idea of
collaboration between a service provider and its customers. The scope includes customer
motivations, resources and capabilities as prerequisites for the service of co-creation. For
instance, customers come to fitness centres with different motivations. In order to translate
this factor into the language of co-creation, it is necessary to draw on the perceptions that
customers might have about the fitness club's contribution to supporting their initial
motivations for exercise (e.g. how the business helped them to generate and/or maintain
motivation). Similarly, in case of customer resources and capabilities, how customers derive
their judgements about service quality should be identified, that is, an assessment of how
competent customers consider themselves to be; what their perceived level of control is (in
terms of the service process and final outcome); and, how they evaluate their personal
contribution to the service quality. Consideration of customers' competence, control and their
personal contribution to the service will identify specific inputs which influence perceived
quality. In turn, the fitness club's resources and capabilities for offering specific types of value
need to be taken into account by asking the following questions: what are the business
priorities, i.e. standardised value that benefits all customers; mass customisation of services or
personalised value; and whether the business has resources for this. Such analysis will
facilitate a conceptual mind shift from the culture of providing/consuming quality to a
collaborative framework with the responsibility shared between the customer and the service
provider.
[Figure 2]
The extant literature gives a good insight into the service quality dimensions that
currently exist in the sport and fitness industry. In order to provide a clear scope for the cocreation encounters in relation to the service quality dimensions, the potential opportunities
for customers' contributions to the service need to be formulated. Also, the level of customer
collaboration and involvement in the co-creation encounters will explain which of the quality
dimensions are controllable by the fitness club to a greater or lesser extent. Finally, what
service quality means for customers in terms of the experience they are taking part in needs to
be identified to produce a more complete picture of customer perceptions the context of
fitness clubs.
The need for developing industry specific service quality models has been recognised by
numerous studies (Brady and Cronin, 2001; Ladhari, 2008; Martinez and Martinez, 2008,
2010). Indeed, insufficient attention to the specific context in which models were developed
can have implications for adaptations or modifications of the models for use in different
contexts, i.e. inadequacy or limited explanation potential (Carrillat et al., 2007; Kaul, 2007;
Keillor et al., 2004; Kim and Jin, 2002). Moreover, the social world and the historical
meaning of that world serve as departure points for consumers in forming their complexity of
views. In turn, a precise consumption context leads to the emergence of salient meaning for
the consumer in that context (Thompson, 1997). This forms a wider argument for future
service quality models to consider the context of the specific industry to which they are
applied (Polyakova and Mirza, 2015). Careful consideration of the unique characteristics
shaping the sport and fitness industry, such as consumer motivations, high involvement of
consumers in production of the service, perceived value of service experiences and after-use
benefits for consumers, will create an improved link to a customer perspective on a service
offered.
In the area of general service quality research, Zeithaml and Bitner (2003) suggested that
psychological factors such as customers' motivations and self-competence, influence their
perceptions of a service and their satisfaction with it. In sport-related industries, the results of
studies showed that motivation influences participation levels in recreational sports
(Tsorbatzoudis et al., 2006). Taking into account customers’ motivation for obtaining the
potential benefits from a service, Lagrosen and Lagrosen (2007) identified factors of physical
change, mental change and pleasure as service quality dimensions in the health and fitness
industry. By contrast, the study by Afthinos et al. (2005) suggested that motivation is not
important in determining customers’ desires for service provided by fitness centres. However,
Afthinos et al. (2005) did not investigate whether motivations influence assessing the
perceived importance of desired service aspects. This provides an argument for researchers to
explore customers' motivations and the role that these motivations play in service co-creation.
This in turn can shed the light on the degree of responsibility that customers are willing to
take for the creation of service. Apart from establishing a new platform for discussion of
service co-creation in perceived quality models in the fitness industry, the proposed approach
provided a basis for applying motivational theories to service quality in the fitness industry.
The impact that initial motivations of customers have on their perceptions of service quality
and the value that customers with different motivations put on their own input into co-creating
service quality, can provide managers of fitness facilities with a framework for the
development of annual customer satisfaction surveys and customer relationship strategies.
Another suggestion that comes from the service quality research is to follow servicedominant logic and explore what role consumers play in service quality co-creation
(Polyakova and Mirza, 2015). Studies by Arnould and Price (1993), Kupers (1998) and
Schembri and Sandberg (2011) confirmed that consumers actively co-construct the quality of
their service experience. This calls for the scope to go beyond a set of fixed service quality
dimensions. Discovering the experiential meaning of service quality (Schembri and Sandberg,
2011) for the customers of fitness clubs can be a tool for drawing on service-dominant logic
as well as value/quality co-creation process. The approach would include understanding the
principles of collaboration and the dialogical interaction between a fitness club and its
customers (co-creation) as well as identifying prerequisites (i.e. resources and capabilities) for
effective collaboration (co-production) (Ballantyne and Varey, 2006).
6. Conclusion
The first purpose of this paper was to examine the concept of perceived service quality in
the fitness industry. The review of service quality models showed that there is a range of
approaches to investigating and measuring service quality in the sport and fitness industry.
The model by Brady and Cronin (2001) has been utilized in several studies of service quality
in fitness activity (e.g. Alexandris et al., 2004; Ko and Pastore, 2005). The model was
recommended by Martinez and Martinez (2010) as “an excellent basis for proposing the
attributes of service quality that can be measured” (p.110). However, it has contradictions that
have not been addressed (such as direction of influence between levels of quality). To
overcome these issues, Martinez and Martinez (2010) suggested using Brady and Cronin’s
(2001) model alongside the identification of the dimensions of service quality in the context
of a particular industry. Another model (SQAS) developed by Lam et al. (2005) specifically
addresses the health–fitness setting and presents a strong basis (from the methodological point
of view) for measuring perceived service quality. Yet, Lam et al. (2005) recommended that
other researchers should re-examine the SQAS using different samples to study factor
structure further and potentially to compare the results with another similar scale. Moreover,
the scale does not offer the measurement of overall perceived service quality and does not
include the outcome quality proposed by several other service quality models.
Various studies (e.g. Brady and Cronin, 2001; Ladhari, 2008; Martinez and Martinez,
2008, 2010) suggest the development of industry-specific models as they could be more
appropriate for the context of a particular industry. There are also examples of enriching
generic service quality models with the attributes specific to the fitness industry (e.g.
Alexandris et al., 2004; Ko and Pastore, 2005). However, both generic and industry-specific
models currently have various types of limitations that have been reviewed in this paper.
Some of limitations are of a methodological character, others are more of a conceptual nature.
The second purpose of the paper was to make some suggestions on how to develop future
service quality models in the fitness industry. While several recommendations for overcoming
the limitations of service quality models for the fitness industry were proposed (Polyakova et
al., 2012), there is a need for a wider approach to the service quality conceptualisation in the
area. The critique of generic service quality models and subsequent call for industry-specific
models suggest development of principally new contextual models. Acknowledging service as
co-creation of experience and value between suppliers and customers (Arnould and Price,
1993; Kupers, 1998; Vargo and Lusch, 2008; Schembri and Sandberg, 2011) and the goal of
this co-creation as fulfilment of customers’ aspirations (Maklan and Klaus, 2011) can bring a
new light to the conceptualisation of service quality in the fitness industry. Service quality
research needs to re-discover the meanings of service quality elements, such as outcome or
valence, and establish conceptually new relationships between service quality in physical
fitness and contextual industry-specific factors (McDougall and Levesque, 1994; Rust and
Oliver, 1994; Schneider and Bowen, 1995; Lovelock, 1996; Brady and Cronin, 2001;
Alexandris et al., 2004; Ko and Pastore, 2004; Hu et al., 2009; Szabó, 2010). In order to
facilitate the shift to service-dominant logic, managers of fitness facilities need to revisit their
tools for capturing customers' perceptions and to update the areas included in customer
satisfaction surveys as well as looking closely at the wording used in the survey questions.
Semantics presents a great tool that can be utilised by managers to create a sense of
collaborative culture and shared responsibility with their customers. This is a practical
implication for a reconceptualisation of service quality in action as well as a culture change in
sport and fitness services with the final aim to embrace genuinely the customers' perspective.
The research community needs to reach a consensus about approaches for updatinging the
models. One of the ways could be an interpretivist approach in which the focus is placed on
consumers lived experiences as a source of service quality (Schembri and Sandberg, 2011).
This will allow to update the literature on service quality with studies that use
phenomenographic techniques and ethnographics in order to ‘re-discover’ the meaning of
quality (Martinez and Martinez, 2010).
Future research needs to explore motivations of customers and their role in fitness service
co-creation. It has been previously suggested that the degree of co-creation can act as an
antecedent of competitive advantage as it affects customer satisfaction, customer loyalty and
service expenditure (Grissemann and Stokburger-Sauer, 2012, Chathoth et al., 2013).
Therefore, it is important to investigate the impact of customers’ co-creation across individual
fitness service dimensions on overall service quality perceptions. This will fill the theoretical
gap in the existing body of literature and serve as a basis for the future research on the impact
of co-creation in other sectors of sport services. It will also provide managers of fitness
facilities with the tools to capture the value that customers assign to their role in terms of cocreating service quality in the context of fitness activity.
References
Afthinos, Y., Theodorakis, N. D. and Nassis, P. (2005), "Customers’ expectations of service
in Greek fitness centers: Gender, age, type of sport center, and motivation differences",
Managing Service Quality, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 245-258.
Akbaba, A. (2006), "Measuring service quality in the hotel industry: a study in a business
hotel in Turkey", International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp.
170-192.
Aldlaigan, A.H. and Buttle, F.A. (2002), "SYSTRA-SQ: a new measure of bank service
quality", International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 362381.
Alexandris, K., Zahariadis, P., Tsorbatzoudis, C. and Grouios, G. (2004), "An empirical
investigation of the relationships among service quality, customer satisfaction and
psychological commitment in a health club context", European Sport Management
Quarterly, Vol.4 No.1, pp. 36-52.
Arnould, E. J. and Price, L.L. (1993), "River Magic: Extraordinary Experience and the
Extended Service Encounter", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, pp. 24-35.
Ballantyne, D. and Varey, R.J. (2006), "Creating value-in-use through marketing interactions:
The exchange logic of relating, communicating, and knowing", Marketing Theory, Vol. 6
No.3, pp. 335–348.
Biddle, S.J.H. and Bailey, C.I.A. (1985), "Motives for participation and attitudes toward
physical activity of adult participants in fitness programmes", Perceptual and Motor
Skills, Vol. 61, pp. 831-834.
Bogomolova S. (2011), "Service quality perceptions of solely loyal customers", International
Journal of Market Research, Vol. 53 No. 6, pp 793-810.
Brady, M. K. and Cronin, J. J. Jr. (2001), "Some New Thoughts on Conceptualizing Perceived
Service Quality: A Hierarchical Approach", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 65, pp. 34–49.
Brady, M.K. and Robertson, C.J. (2001), "Searching for a consensus on the antecedent role of
service quality and satisfaction: An exploratory cross-national study", Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 51 No.1, pp. 53-60.
Carrillat, F. A., Jaramillo, F. and Mulki, J. P. (2007), "The validity of the SERVQUAL and
SERVPERF scales: A meta-analytic view of 17 years of research across five continents",
International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 18, pp. 472-490.
Chang, K. and Chelladurai, P. (2003), "System-Based Quality Dimensions in Fitness
Services: Development of the Scale of Quality", The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 23
No. 5, pp. 65-83.
Chathoth, P., Altinay, L., Harrington, R.J., Okumus, F., and Chan, E. S. W. (2013) "Coproduction versus co-creation: a process based continuum in the hotel service context",
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 32, p. 11-20.
Chelladurai, P., Scott, F. L. and Haywood-Farmer, J. (1987), "Dimensions of fitness services
development of a model", Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 1, pp. 159-172.
Crompton, J.M., MacKay, K.J. and Fesenmaier, D.R. (1991), "Identifying dimensions of
service quality in public recreation", Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, Vol.
9 No. 3, pp.15-28.
Cronin, J. J. Jr., and Taylor, S. A. (1992), "Measuring service quality: a re-examination and
extention", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, pp. 55-68.
Dabholkar, P. (1995), "A contingency framework for predicting causality between customer
satisfaction and service quality", Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 22, pp. 101-106.
Dabholkar, P. A., Thrope, D. I., and Rentz, J. O.(1996), "Measure of service quality for retail
stores: Scale development and validation", Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 3-16.
Dagger, T. and Sweeney, J.C. (2006), "The Effect of Service Evaluations on Behavioural
Intentions and Quality-of-Life", Journal of Service Research, Vol. 9 No1, pp. 3-18.
Dagger, T. and Sweeney, J.C. (2007), "Service quality attribute weights: How do novice and
long-term customers construct service quality perceptions?", Journal of Service
Research, Vol.10 No.1, pp. 22-42.
Etgar, M. (2008), "A descriptive model of the customer co-production process", Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 97-108.
Fitzgerald, L., Johnston, R., Brignall, S. and Voss, C. (1993), Performance measurement in
service businesses, CIMA, Cambridge.
Funk, D. C. and James, J. D. (2001), "The Psychological Continuum Model: A conceptual
framework for understanding an individual’s psychological connection to sport", Sport
Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 119–150.
Getty, J.M. and Getty, R.L. (2003), "Lodging quality index (LQI): assessing customers
perceptions of quality deliver", International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 94-104.
Ghobadian, A., Speller, S., and Jones, M. (1994), "Service Quality: Concepts and Models",
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 11 No. 9, pp.43-66.
Grissemann, U.S. and Stokburger-Sauer, N.E. (2012), "Customer co-creation of travel
services: The role of company support and customer satisfaction with the co-creation
performance", Tourism management, Vol. 33, pp. 1483-1492.
Grönroos, C. (1997), "Value-driven relational marketing: from products to resources and
competencies", Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 13, pp.407-419.
Grönroos, C. (1984), "A Service Quality Model and its Marketing Implications", European
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 18 No.4, pp. 36-44.
Gummesson, E. (2007), "Exit services marketing - enter service marketing", Journal of
customer behaviour, Vol. 6, pp. 113-141.
Howat, G., Absher, J., Crilley, G. and Milne, I. (1996), "Measuring customer service quality
in sports and leisure centres", Managing Leisure, Vol. 1, pp. 77-89.
Hu, H.-H., Kandampully, J., and Juwaheer, T. D. (2009), "Relationships and impacts of
service quality, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and image: an empirical study",
The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 111-125.
Ives, B. and Olson, M. H. (1984), "User involvement and MIS success: a review of research",
Management Science, Vol. 30, pp. 586-603.
Karatepe, O., Yavas, U., and Babakus, E. (2005), "Measuring service quality of banks: scale
development and validation", Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 12 No. 5,
pp. 373-83.
Kaul, S. (2007), "Measuring retail service quality: examining applicability of international
research perspectives in India", Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, Vol. 32, pp.
15-26.
Keillor, B.D., Hult, G.T.M., and Kandemir, D. (2004), "A study of the service encounter in
eight countries", Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 12, pp. 9-35.
Kim, S. and Jin, B. (2002), "Validating the retail service quality scale for US and Korean
customers of discount stores: an exploratory study", Journal of Services Marketing, Vol.
16, pp. 223-237.
Kim, D., and Kim, S. Y. (1995), "QUESC: An Instrument for Assessing the Service Quality
of Sport Centers in Korea", Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 9, pp. 208-220.
Ko, Y. J. and Pastore, D. L. (2005), "A Hierarchical Model of Service Quality for the
Recreational Sport Industry", Sport Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 14, pp. 84-97.
Ko, Y. J. and Pastore, D. L. (2004), "Current Issues and Conceptualizations of Service
Quality in the Recreation Sport Industry", Sport Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 13, pp. 158166.
Kremer, J., Trew, K. and Ogle, S. (Eds.) (1997), Young people's involvement in sport,
Routledge, London.
Kupers, W. (1998), "Phenomenology of Embodied Productivity in Services", International
Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 9, pp. 337–358.
Ladhari, R. (2008), "Alternative measures of service quality: a review", Managing Service
Quality, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 65-86.
Lagrosen, S. and Lagrosen, Y. (2007), "Exploring service quality in the health and fitness
industry", Managing Service Quality, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 41-53.
Lam, E. T. C., Zhang, J.J. and Jensen, B. E. (2005), "Service Quality Assessment Scale
(SQAS): An Instrument for Evaluating Service Quality of Health-Fitness Clubs",
Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 79-111.
Lam, T. and Zhang, H.Q. (1999), "Service Quality of Travel Agents: The Case of Travel
Agents in Hong Kong", Tourism Management, Vol. 20, pp. 341-349.
Lovelock, C.H. (1996), Service Marketing, 3rd edition, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River,
NJ.
Macintosh, E. and Doherty, A. (2007), "Reframing the service environment in the fitness
industry", Managing Leisure, Vol. 12 No.4, pp. 273-289.
Mahony, D., Madrigal, R. and Howard, D. (2000), "Using the psychological commitment to
teamscale to segment sport consumers based on loyalty" Sport Marketing Quarterly, Vol.
9 No.1, pp. 15–25.
Maklan, S. and Klaus, Ph. (2011), "Customer Experience: Are We Measuring the Right
Things", International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 53 No. 6, pp. 771-792.
Markland, D. and Ingledew, D. K. (2007), "Exercise participation motives: A selfdetermination theory perspective", in Hagger M.S. & Chatzisarantis N.L.D. (Eds), Selfdetermination theory in exercise and sport, Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL, pp. 23–24.
Martinez, J. A. G. and Martinez, L. C. (2010) "Rethinking perceived service quality: An
alternative to hierarchical and multidimensional models", Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, Vol. 21 No.1, pp. 93-118.
Martinez, L. C. and Martinez, J. A. G. (2008), "Developing a multidimensional and
hierarchical service quality model for the travel agency industry", Tourism Management,
Vol. 29, pp. 706 –720.
Martinez, L. C. and Martinez, J. A. G. (2007), "Cognitive–affective model of consumer
satisfaction. An exploratory study within the framework of a sporting event", Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 60, pp. 108-114.
McDonald, H. and Karg, A. J. (2014), "Managing co-creation in professional sports: The
antecedents and consequences of ritualized spectator behavior", Sport Management
Review, Vol. 17 No.3, pp. 292–309.
McDougall, G. H. G. and Levesque, T. (1994), "A revised view of service quality dimensions:
An empirical investigation", Journal of Professional Service Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 1,
pp. 189-209.
Moxham, C. and Wiseman, F. (2009), "Examining the development, delivery and
measurement of service quality in the fitness industry: A case study", Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 467-482.
Mullen, S.P. and Whaley, D. E. (2010), "Age, gender, and fitness club membership: Factors
related to initial involvement and sustained participation", International Journal of Sport
and Exercise Psychology, Vol.8 No.1, pp. 24-35.
Papadimitriou, D. A. and Karteroliotis, K. (2000), "The Service Quality Expectations in
Private Sport and Fitness Centers: A Reexamination of the Factor Structure", Sport
Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 157-164.
Parasuraman, A., Zeitmal, V. A. and Berry, L. L. (1988), "SERVQUAL: a Multiple-Item
Scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality", Journal of Retailing, Vol.
64 No. 1, pp. 12-40.
Parasuraman, A., Zeitmal, V. A. and Berry, L. L., (1985), "A Conceptual Model of Service
Quality and Its Implications for Future Research", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, pp. 4150.
Philip, G. and Hazlett, S.A. (1997), "The measurement of service quality: a new P-C-P
attributes model", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 14
No. 3, pp. 260-286.
Polyakova, O. and Mirza, M. (2015), "Perceived service quality models: Are they still
relevant?", The Marketing Review, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp.59-82.
Polyakova, O., Mirza, M. and Jackson, H. (2012), "Service quality in fitness centres: literature
review and further research", paper presented at the Academy of Marketing Conference,
2nd – 5th July 2012, Southampton University, Southampton, available at:
http://marketing.conferenceservices.net/resources/327/2958/pdf/AM2012_0312_paper.pdf (accessed 07 April 2014).
Prahalad, C. K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004), "Co-creation experiences: The next practice in
value creation", Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 5–14
Roberts, G.C. (1992), Motivation in sport and exercise, Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL, pp.
3-29.
Rust, R. T. and Oliver, R. L. (1994), "Service Quality: Insights and Managerial Implications
from the Frontier", in Rust, R. T. and Oliver, R. L. (Eds.), Service Quality: New
Directions in Theory and Practice, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp.1-19.
Ryan, R. M., Frederick, C. M., Lepes, D., Rubio, N., and Sheldon, K. M. (1997), "Intrinsic
motivation and exercise adherence", International Journal of Sport Psychology, Vol. 28,
pp. 335-354.
Schembri, S. and Sandberg, J. (2011), "The experiential meaning of service quality",
Marketing Theory, 11, pp. 165-186.
Schneider, B. and Bowen, D. (1995), Winning the Service Game, Harvard Business, School
Press, Boston, MA.
Sureshchandar, G.S., Rajendran, C. and Anantharaman, R.N. (2002), "Determinants of
customer-perceived service quality: a confirmatory factor analysis approach", Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 9-34.
Szabó, A. (2010), "Leisure sport services quality", paper presented at 7th International
Conference on Service Systems and Service Management (ICSSSM), 28-30 June 2010,
Tokyo, pp. 1-6.
Thatcher, J., Thatcher, R., Day, M., Portas, M., and Hood, S. (2009), Sport and Exercise
Science, Learning Matters, Exeter.
Thompson, C.J. (1997), "Interpreting Consumers: A Hermeneutical Framework for Deriving
Marketing Insights from the Texts of Consumers’ Consumption Stories", Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 34, pp. 438-456.
The Leisure Database Company (2013), "Fitness industry improves growth at a price",
available at: http://www.theleisuredatabase.com/news/news-archive/fitness-industryimproves-growth-at-a-price (accessed 07 April 2014).
Tomes, A.E. and Ng, S.C.P. (1995), "Service quality in hospital care: the development of an
in-patient questionnaire", International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 8
No. 3, pp. 25-33.
Tsorbatzoudis, H., Alexandris, K., Zahariadis, P. and Groiuos, G. (2006), "Examining the
relationship between recreational sport participation and intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation and amotivation", Perceptual and Motor Skills, Vol.103, pp.363-374.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. and Smart, P. (2003), "Towards a Methodology for Developing
Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review", British
Journal of Management, Vol. 14, pp. 207–222.
Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R.F. (2008), "From goods to service(s): Divergences and
convergences of logics", Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 37, pp. 254-259.
Walsh, K. (2013), "Global health club industry proves resilient", IHRSA Global Report,
available at: http://download.ihrsa.org/press/2013_IHRSA_Global_Report_Feature.pdf
(accessed 07 April 2014).
Weed, M. E. (2005a), "Research Synthesis in Sport Management: Dealing with "Chaos in the
Brickyard", European Sport Management Quarterly, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 77-90.
Weed, M. E. (2005b), "Meta-interpretation: A method for the interpretive synthesis of
qualitative research", Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Wilkins, H., Merrilees, B. and Herington, C. (2007), "Toward an understanding of total
service quality in hotels", International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 26 No.
4, pp. 840-53.
Wolfinbarger, M. and Gilly, M.C. (2003), "eTailQ: dimensionalizing, measuring and
predicting etail quality, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 79 No. 3, pp. 183-98.
Woratschek, H., Horbel, C. and Popp, B. (2014), "Value cocreation in sport management",
European Sport Management Quarterly, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 1-5.
Yi, Y. and Gong, T. (2013), "Customer value co-creation behaviour: scale development and
validation", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66 No. 9, pp. 1279-1284.
Yildiz, S. M. (2011), "An importance-performance analysis of fitness center service quality:
Empirical results from fitness centers in Turkey", African Journal of Business
Management, Vol. 5 No. 16, pp. 7031-7041.
Zeitmal, V. A. and Bitner, M.J. (2003), Services marketing: Integrating customer focus
across the firm, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Appendix 1
Analysis of service quality dimensions in various models
Dimensions
Authors
Alexandris Chang & Kim
et al.
Chelladurai &Kim
Personnel
Ko
& Lagrosen & Lam et Yildiz
Pastore
Lagrosen
al.
Employee attitude
+
+
+
+
+
+
Employee
reliability,
responsiveness
complaints
+
+
+
+
+
+
to
Privacy of members
information
+
+
Presentable and neat
appearance
+
Feedback
to
members about their
development
Provide
motivation
members
+
+
+
+
Personal approach
+
+
Knowledgeable and
skilful
+
Work
enthusiastically
+
Adequate
space/layout
+
good
to
Prompt service
Physical
environment
+
Alexandris Chang &
Chelladurai
et al.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Kim
&Kim
Ko &
Pastore
Lagrosen &
Lagrosen
Lam et
al.
Yildiz
+
+
+
+
Locker room
+
Brightness
+
+
+
Cleanliness
+
+
+
Modern
facilities/equipment
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Professional looking
+
Accessibility
of
facility/Convenience
of location
+
Security
+
Temperature
illumination
+
and
Attractive
facilities/nice
atmosphere
+
+
Alexandris Chang &
et al.
Chelladurai
with
Kim
&Kim
+
Social opportunity
Other customers do
not
affect
the
service badly(only
positive)
Ko &
Pastore
+
+
Consultation
specialists
Appropriate
+
+
+
Lagrosen &
Lagrosen
+
Lam et
al.
Yildiz
+
+
Lam et
al.
Yildiz
+
+
+
Pleasant
social
environment
+
Alexandris Chang &
et al.
Chelladurai
Supporting
services
+
+
Number
of
participant groups in
the program
Interaction
other clients
+
+
Good
condition/
availability
of
equipment
Social environment
+
Kim
&Kim
Ko &
Pastore
Lagrosen &
Lagrosen
with
+
+
+
+
background music
Child care
+
Food and
services
drink
+
+
First aid for ailment
+
Grooming
necessities provided
+
Diverse /up-to-date
information
available
+
Wide
range
services
of
+
+
Availability
of
various methods of
communication
+
Alexandris Chang &
et al.
Chelladurai
Program
+
Kim
&Kim
Ko &
Pastore
Lagrosen &
Lagrosen
Lam et
al.
Yildiz
Timely
announcements
Appropriate timing
of programs
Rich
content
+
+
program
+
Program diversity
+
+
Operating time
Programs
attractive
+
are
+
+
+
+
+
Program availability
at appropriate level
Outcome
+
Alexandris Chang &
et al.
Chelladurai
Kim &
Kim
Ko &
Pastore
Lagrosen &
Lagrosen
Energy
+
+
Health
+
+
Lam et
al.
Yildiz
Psychological wellbeing
+
+
Mood
+
+
Fitness
level/physical
ability
+
+
Valence
+
+
Pleasure (social and
physical)
+
Change
appearance
+
Service quality
in
+